A simple build to demonstrate conservation of momentum

[justsomeone]

NO!!!!!!

[Allen_T]

@justsomeone,
As you wish. Still, if It does work, will be funny. After all, would be pursuing Bessler's wheel on/in my Bessler page.
I do find it interesting though, some people in here are credible because they help to make Bessler's work known while others are credible for trying to keep it from being realized.
I think Scott and even Ovyyus wouldn't mind seeing it happen, but with people like AB Hammer, Jim_Mich and the Arrache build group, their credibility is based on discrediting people.
It is easy to say something won't work. After all, perpetual motion literally is impossible. If perpetual motion were possible then something macroscopic like an atom could be taken from it's N1 state to it's N2 state.
But with a gravity powered wheel, the trick is, it's not powered by it's own inherent gravitational forces. You know, why a board is a board. It's molecules all have their own inherent gravity.
Instead, a perpetual motion machine converts the Earth's gravity into it's own motion. And as a result, our planet slows relative to the energy the perpetual motion machine takes away from it.
One example of this is our own moon. It slows the Earth's rotation relative to it's mass. Of course, all of this is fairly basic information anyone knows.
Of course, I could be wrong. And justsmeone, Alan knows I am smart, kind of why he wants credit for my work. Unfortunately. I do have other work I am pursuing like improved desalination.
All Alan wants it for is to brag in forums. And just as in the movie Blood Sport, if he wants one, he has to take time to learn how to build one and get it to work. If I wanted to, I couldn't give it to him because he doesn't know enough to take it. That's why I still have it. :-D

edited to add; justsomeone, AB Hammer and Jim_Mich don't have to go to work to support themselves, I do. Kind of why I need to be successful.
Doctors messing me up when they treated me for cancer has caused me many problems. I am motivated.
But people who sit at home and get a check have no such motivation.

[rlortie]

Jim L.

I was willing to ignore you, knowing that you soon would be banned. But now you have disturbed a sleeping beast that you should have left alone.

YOU wrote:

I think Scott and even Ovyyus wouldn't mind seeing it happen, but with people like AB Hammer, Jim_Mich and the Arrache build group, their credibility is based on discrediting people.

For your information Arrache has never discredited anyone, and if so it was with justifiable reasoning. Furthermore Arrache no longer legally exists, its registration and Corporation license have expired and I have retired.

Although you already have enough red dots to ban you, you have now received another for your libel slander. It is considered a "Tort" and you are wide open for a lawsuit.

Ralph

[Allen_T]

Ralph,
Read Alan's thread calling me the world's biggest fraud. The Arrache Build Group was well represented. Isn't that where you and Alan got a lot of your green dots from ?
After all, neither of you have ever shown any work. Not sure how people can be credible builders when their work is too good to make known.
That goes right back to Wagner having Bessler being arrested for being a fraud. What did Wagner ever show ? Nothing.
I don't think any builder should be considered credible unless their work is open sourced like mine is.
Of course, in overunity.com, that was considered how to prevent fraud from happening. But you and Alan changed that, didn't you ?
You did. You 2 had your keel effect. Like Mt 25. You said it can't work because you found a principle that didn't allow for it.
The scientific community allows for peer review. You, Alan and Jim_Mich don't. Your claims can not be questioned or verified.
Besides Ralph, am hoping to have my machine working this weekend. If so, it will show people sitting at home living off of what ever pension they have, that they have no need to do anything. They're retired for a reason.
I'm not retired. I don't mind working. And as for health, mine has probably been much worse than yours but I still worked.
Maybe one day you will post a build. I've never seen you or your 2 friends pursue a build openly to demonstrate your understanding.
Until you show it, I can't know it. :-)

p.s., I do have my own Bessler page. Work is being shown. That is, an actual build. And you have what ? A red dot ? That's a joke Ralph. Why don't you go tell it to a kid ? After all, Alan wants my father's phone number so he can call him. You 2, I don't get it. Laurel and Hardy were a comedy team, what are the 2 of you ? Oops, can't forget Ralph.
We've got the 3 Stooges. And none of you have a job to go to tomorrow, or ever again. Bored pensioners.

[eccentrically1]

@All,
Am curious, anyone in here interested in why I think my build will work ?
...
Instead, a perpetual motion machine converts the Earth's gravity into it's own motion. And as a result, our planet slows relative to the energy the perpetual motion machine takes away from it.
One example of this is our own moon. It slows the Earth's rotation relative to it's mass. Of course, all of this is fairly basic information anyone knows.
Of course, I could be wrong.

Yes, you could be wrong.
Is anyone interested in why he could be wrong?

[Allen_T]

eccentrically1,
For my own build, Ralph, Alan and Jim_Mich have not offered an opinion as to why it will not work.

As for Bessler, he did say;
it will indeed be possible to look for a movement and, finally to find one in them

And with the Keel Effect, myself, I called it the Kill Effect because no further discussion was necessary.

With Mt 31, rlortie and AB Hammer's "Keel Effect" proved it had no value. If someone takes the time to read Johann Bessler's Maschinen Tractate, he disagrees.
But as Ralph and Alan would say, stop considering how various drawings allow for a movement.

edited to add; In my first post, I have given the link to my Bessler page which also shows my own build.

[eccentrically1]

Do you think your build will work because it converts gravity into its own motion?
Do you think that is why Bessler's wheel worked?
You could be wrong, you said. Do you know why you could be wrong?

[Allen_T]

eccentrically1,
Being wrong is always a possibility. Still, I am building it because I think I have learned something.
With the discussion I tried drawing AB Hammer into about pulleys, he had nothing to say. With my own build, if it demonstrates a basic principle of how pulleys work, then Bessler's "complex" method might be considered.
After all, how many wheels did Bessler build ? It was a lot. This is because to understand something, it does take trial and error. If you consider Edison, he found a 1,000 ways that a light bulb didn't work.
With Bessler' having left us his drawings, it doesn't take that much.

[rlortie]

Ah! to reminisce old times: The comic strip "Winnie Winkle the Breadwinner" with Denny Dimwit lives on!

[AB Hammer]

Jim Jim Jim LOL

I already told you. It is a trade and trades in the same planes don't work in a wheel. You have to go beyond trades or at least try to get them out of the same plane.

To address another thing you talked about.

In the quest of a gravity/perpetual motion machine. To understand what don't work leaves doors open to what might work.

Just simple logic.


PS Ralph and jim_mich had their deserved green dots before you or I came to the forum.

[Allen_T]

Alan,
Why don't you discuss something specific ? Vague statements demonstrate nothing. As far as Ralph and Jim_Mich goes, haven't seen either one of them build something. Also, Bessler's drawings keep being discredited.

@Everyone except for rlortie, ab hammer and jim_mich,
If you consider Mt 26, it has a weight that rolls in a channel. Kind of obvious, right ?
And then there is Mt 138 - 141. If you notice the spinning top, it spins for what reason ? Another obvious thing. It's because a string is wrapped around it.
And with Mt 126, Bessler said that there is an augmented problem. It could be that his weight that rolls in the channel is like the spinning top, it has a line wrapped around it.
If that is the case, then how do you "reel" in the line ? You use a pulley. If the pulley does not rotate, it will retract a line about half the distance of it's radius.
Another way of considering this, look at what I am building. It might be Mt 26. And it might be that because of my background, I was able to understand what the augmented Bessler was referring to.

edited to add, while you can see in Mt 26 where 2 lines connected to weights are anchored, I am also using 2 lines on each weight to anchor them as well.

[AB Hammer]

Jim L

Here is your first lesson to look at the MT's in a different lite. Turn them on their sides with the descending side down. Now see if there is anything above the new 9:00 o'clock to 3:00 o'clock line that can lift the actions back up. Note MT26 has no counter to lift the weight back up.


All thanks to ovyyus / Bill for these fine drawings.

[AB Hammer]

Jim L

Here is what I see for MT127. pardon the shaky lines but you turn it with the red Top at the top and this is where it would stop in its position It would have to much bellow the 9:00 to the 3:00 line. No runner.

So again. You are having problems seeing by not keeping an open mind and listen to what is being said. Don't take constructive criticism as an attack. The value of the forum is not to push people into showing everything they have for peoples ideas belong to them. But to listen and use those different views that may help you see a better way.

[Allen_T]

"And those who were seen dancing were thought to be insane by those who could not hear the music."
- Nietzsche

Alan,
Scott might want to consider banning you.
When you say "
So again. You are having problems seeing by not keeping an open mind and listen to what is being said".
And with both Mt 26 and Mt 127 you say non runners. With engineering, it is composed of mathematics and mechanics. You showed neither.
You have said you will defend your credibility. I think you are doing just that.
With Mt 26, if you had considered math and how it can work with mechanics, you'd be aware of what the attached drawing explains. If you were smart, you would have apologized to me, but you aren't.

@All, with Mt 26, if a pulley is used as we use a cam today, with a radius of 3 inches or 7.5 cm's, a 90° segment has a length of 4.7 inches or 11.9 cm's.
This allows for a retraction of about 1.7 inches or 4.4 cm's. If you consider the drawing, as the weight rotates from position 1 to position 2, the line is anchored at top center.
Bessler did say that with 1 cross bar, it moved slow enough to watch. But the more cross bars he added, the faster it went.

As for me, have to wonder why AB Hammer keeps repeating that an "open mind" accepts Bessler's designs as non runners. He is being very helpful. Not really, that is unless a working Bessler wheel would offend the members of this forum. But that's not for me to decide.

[Allen_T]

@All,
With Mt 127, have built it. This is a video of the basic frame work I used.
As it turned out, the water proof material that I used was to stiff. I do have leather
but have been wanting to pursue a build that is a simpler design to build.
With my "Mt 26" build, have found out that nylon line stretches. Shouldn't be to surprised by this.
Will be using nylon fishing line to see if I can replicate the mathematical diagram. I think with leather, since it is not composed of multiple lines being wound together, it won't be able to be stretched.
If so, then that might be what Bessler used.
Unfortunately, as Mr. Bauldree repeatedly points out, he does not consider how different materials have different properties.

was a duplicate video but this link to my Mt 127 build should be good.
One important aspect of building is doing what are called "mock ups'. Basically they're parts of builds to verify or reject assumptions. With this video, it suggests that with a pliable water proof material that it could work.

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=BdOxhNSV4dA